my CPL saved me from a ticket!...

This is a discussion on my CPL saved me from a ticket!... within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by DrLewall
so if your lady was driving your vehicle and they ran your tags, will she then be asked to step out ...

so if your lady was driving your vehicle and they ran your tags, will she then be asked to step out and cuffed while your vehicle is searched? I am so glad that our permits are tied to our drivers license rather than our car tags

Neither, there is no cross reference in NH that I know of.

Besides, the OP states:

Anyway, I suspect that they had ran my plates while I was stopped at a red light,....

An assumption on his part, I don't know the procedure for FL. They might have had him get out of the car based solely on his driving, nothing else. He's ASSUMING it was related to his CPL.

We're all reading his side of the story. Think about it, if it were you would you say, "..I sped away burning rubber, jammed on my brakes for the stupid pedestrians in the crosswalk, then bolted again." Of course not.

I'm not crucifying anyone here, but there was obviously probable cause to be pulled over. And then the rest of the story.

I agree, as does the OP, that there was plenty of probable cause for being pulled over. But then assumptions begin to be made. My rule of thumb is to deal with facts, not assumptions.

Based on HIS story, because there is no other to be had, I don't see probable cause for ordering him out of car, frisking him, taking his weapon, and placing him in cuffs. Were his story to change or have another side of the story, things might be different. But based on the facts presented here, I see nothing.

so if your lady was driving your vehicle and they ran your tags, will she then be asked to step out and cuffed while your vehicle is searched? I am so glad that our permits are tied to our drivers license rather than our car tags

I'd like to think that they'd see that the driver wasn't the owner, but who knows.
I'm only speculating that they knew when they ran my plates. Washington issues them via the Sherriff & Police offices, not via the DMV like some other states, and they use a driver's license as proof of ID, as well as fringerprints and a background check.
Of course the registered address and name of both my car and my DL are the same, so it's not a stretch to think that they punched in my plates and got my DL as well.

To highvoltage: how's the view from way up there on your high horse?

I'd think that how quickly the situation was de-elevated, from out of the car and in handcuffs, to gabbing on about firearms and released w/out even a written warning should suggest that my traffic violation was not very severe.
There was no screeching of the tires, no squeeling to a halt at a cross walk...I only mention that part as evidence of the fact that I was in control; in fact, they were not even in the roadway when I came to stop, but on the curb waiting to cross.

You made wrong assumptions about his "erratic" driving as he has pointed out and you still can't acknowledge that...real helpful

Here's an early post by you in this thread:

I've heard about other people getting cuffed too...I'd be pissed if it happened to me. We, as carriers, are already often scrutinized by the general public as vigilante wackos, we don't need those that are supposed to help uphold the law make us look like criminals in public like that. If that happened to me, and people from work saw it or something, I'd be super ticked off.

My statements were based upon his initial post where he only stated that he was driving a little faster than he should have. This indicates to me, a minor traffic infraction. This is not making an assumption, this is making a logical conclusion.

Assuming he was "driving like a bat out of hell" would be an assumption.

My statements were based upon his initial post where he only stated that he was driving a little faster than he should have. This indicates to me, a minor traffic infraction. This is not making an assumption, this is making a logical conclusion......

However, you're drawing a conclusion that's not based on all the evidence. As the saying goes, there are three sides to every story, each person's side, and then there's the truth. It's about perception, each person's perception is slightly different. The process is to draw a conclusion based on all the perceptions that closely matches the truth.

We don't have all the perceptions, therefore we can't draw conclusions.

I only offered a differing opinion by playing devil's advocate. In other words, what if his actions behind the vehicle were slightly more erroneous than he let on. What if the LEOs involved had probable cause based on his driving (which it appears they did). What if, based on that probable cause they decided to restrain him (which they did). Then after checking his records and deciding he wasn't a risk, they removed the cuffs (which they did).

"Hindsight is 20/20 and you weren't there. Also, at the time of the stop the OP was doing a pretty good job of a criminal by violating traffic laws. If the OP, or any of you want to avoid being placed in handcuffs it's real simple, don't do things that bring unwanted attention upon you by your local LEO."

Not a matter of not liking what you said, Biker. it's an opinion, and I have no problem with it. I do, however, disagree. IF violating traffic laws HAS become a reason to cuff someone, then why aren't there more people seen cuffed on the side of the road? Now, I'm willing to grant that we only have one side, but that's all we have. Anything else is pure conjecture. Based solely on the story discussed, I think that the officers were out of line. Asking him to step out? No problem. But as he got out he told them that he has a CCW, and where the gun was, and was polite. That's being pretty cooperative. It shouldn't have gone farther. Cuffing him was completely out of line, and had it been me, I would have been on the line to Internal Affairs as soon as I got home. So anyway, that's MY opinion.

[QUOTE=Squawker;1129184: I would have been on the line to Internal Affairs as soon as I got home. So anyway, that's MY opinion.[/QUOTE]

Just a quick note about this last line: if it's not in writing, it never happened. I know we live in a time when we endeavor to manage our entire life via a cell phone, but complaints to/about the police, excuses for jury duty, car/appliance warranty disagreements, etc., really require you to write a letter - either on your PC or long-hand.

When you have to deal with a potentially litigious situation, you want to be on-the-recond, and that means it needs to be in writing.